Tag Archives: destiny

astrology, Divination, Divination Master Post, Fortune-telling, I Ching / Yi Jing, Occultism and Esoterism, Playing Cards, Spirituality and Psychology, Tarot, Uncategorized, Vera Sibilla

Exploring the Present Or Scrying the Future?

Leave a comment

As a diviner, I have no objection to making predictions about what is likely to happen. I see the current taboo about the future as a mix of delusion and ignorance. Our current culture comes at the tail-end of the myth of the self-made man that has animated much of our recent (and even not-so-recent) past. This myth has strongly influenced the Zeitgeist of the current occult wave, which started at the end of the XVIII century and continues, though declining–putrefying, even–to this day.

The occult developments have in turn trickled down into pop spirituality and have fostered the belief, now extremely popular, that all it takes to change one’s reality is to tune into the wavelength where one’s delusion corresponds to objective facts, and that nothing about one’s identity is more than a socially-conditioned self-identification that can be simply deconstructed and cast off like a cloak in favor of something else as the whim of the day dictates.

This implies the idea that the future is a completely blank slate and that therefore divination can only be used as a tool for self-reflection on the present to facilitate this process of self-making and self-remaking. Unfortunately, the self-reflection in question regularly resolves itself into simply telling the querent what they already think or would like to think of themselves, but packaged in empowering language within a context in which they assume they are communing with divinity. “Wow, the Gods think exactly the same as I do! How wise!”

Anyone who lives in actual reality and has spent five minutes reflecting on it know that this view of existence is demonstrably false (although, like many false things, it contains faint traces of truth). Each of us has a path in life that is unique, containing specific challenges and opportunities, possibilities and impossibilities. Divination is good at detecting these patterns and their likely outcome in the near future.

Still, I find that there is value in employing traditional divination in exploring the present. The language of traditional divination is frank, crisp and concrete, as it comes from a deep understanding of the fact that, if what is above is as what is below and what is within is as what is without, then what is above or within cannot be a metaphysical soup of saccarine inanities, but must correspond to the complex interplay of pleasure and sorrow of the below and without.

In other words, if a tiktok psychic might tell you that you always end up with the wrong guy because you have a soul contract that stipulates that you need to come into contact with your inner queen, traditional divination is more than happy to let you know that it’s because you are a basic harlot who chooses basic idiots.

This is not to say that there is a god or a spirit judging the querent through us or through the oracle: it is merely a dispassionate look at your life from a dispassionate observer on a simple example of causality. It also does not imply that we, as diviners, shouldn’t learn to speak with tact and diplomacy. However, the employment of actual divination techniques allows us to shed light on the querent’s present in terms that might actually be helpful to them.

We never leave a divination session unaltered. The knowledge we gain changes us necessarily: me knowing about X is not the same as me not knowing about it. If X is in my hands, then knowing about it can give me some power over it. If it isn’t in my hands, then knowing about it gives me awareness of the limits that define my unique path through life. That’s growth, too.

MQS

Cartomancy, Divination, Divination Master Post, Fortune-telling, Geomancy, I Ching / Yi Jing, Playing Cards, Tarot, Vera Sibilla

Predictions that Change Behaviors

1 Comment

I don’t remember if I already talked about a reading I did for myself some time ago. I was expecting a parcel but needed to go somewhere else, so I asked the cards if the package would come on that day. The cards clearly answered in the negative, and I was right: I went out, and the parcel arrived the day after.

Thinking back on this, I was reminded of an experience reported by famous British astrologer John Frawley. I cannot remember if he discusses it in The Real Astrology or in his Horary Textbook, but it goes somewhat like this: he was waiting for some repairman to come to his house, but he also wanted to take a relaxing bath, so he cast a horary chart to know when the guy would come, only to discover that he wouldn’t. So he slipped into the bathtube, and his prediction proved correct

I believe this kind of readings is the most fun and instructive on the nature of divination. Ultimately, divination is intelligence-gathering. Sentient beings organize their behavior based on the information available to them. Therefore, new information is bound to change the being’s behavior.

The more complex the organism, of course, the more factors come into play, but the basic principle remains true. This is not to say that anything is possible, because only someone with infinite knowledge would know how to overcome all kinds of situations he or she finds unpleasant. We humble mortals are always restricted by difficult circumstances. Still, the information we gather through divination is not, in principle, different from the one we gather through other means which are all just as imperfect.

A fatalist might try to defend the idea of an all-encompassing destiny by arguing that the prediction is itself part of the person’s fate. I was destined to pull those cards and go out. But this stance, interestingly enough, invalidates the idea of prediction itself. If everything is destiny, then even knowledge that everything is destiny is destiny, rather than the truth.

I believe that divination is not simply communication with the divine, but also a form of deification: if we take God on one hand, that is, someone who is capable to be the pure consequence of its own choice, and a rock on the other, that is, something that simply passively receives whatever action external forces exert on it, then divination moves us closer to the divine condition of being the consequence of our own choice.

This is also why I am skeptical of airy-fairy forms of divination that try to take the focus away from concrete life in the name of some vapid divine idea. Ultimately, there is far more divine depth to Frawley’s ability to take a bath thanks to a horary chart than there is to questions like “How can I embody the divine feminine and honor my ancestral heritage more fully?”

MQS

Cartomancy, Divination, Divination Master Post, Fortune-telling, I Ching / Yi Jing, Occultism and Esoterism, Philosophy, Playing Cards, Spirituality and Psychology, Tarot, Vera Sibilla

Why You Can’t Be a Fatalist

Leave a comment

This post is part of my Notes on Divination series. This gets somewhat philosophical and is rough and not organized, so bear with me.

I already talked about the limitations of free will in divination. Undoubtedly I will need to talk a lot more about it in the future. For now, though, I want to discuss the other side of the coin, namely predestination.

Predesination is the idea that the future is predetermined. This is already vague, because the way in which the future is supposed to be predetermined changes based on the particular view: the way in which a flower necessarily follows from a seed is not the same way as the ending of a movie necessarily follows its beginning. No matter how many times you rewind, Baby Jane always snaps. She cannot do otherwise, for her life has been scripted and it plays out from beginning to end according to the script.

In the case of the seed, although there are contingent factors at play (for instance, the quality of the soil or the amount of water it receives) we are talking about a form of internal necessity. Baby Jane’s life, though, is determined by external factors: she is nothing more than what the author of the book and those of the movie wanted her to be.

The question is: could Baby Jane understand that her life is so predetermined, if someone told her? Let us suppose that the writers had added a scene where she consults a diviner and has her fortunes told to her. The diviner is a good one, and correctly tells her what is going to happen to her, her sister, etc.

Does this change things? The answer, in this case, is no. It doesn’t change anything, because the fortune teller’s scene has also been scripted and plays out for the same reason every other scene in the movie plays out. From an external standpoint, the meeting with the diviner would be no different than any other part of the movie. It would be just another link in the chain.

The Fatalist

But this is not how divination works in real life. In real life, we don’t have the privilege of an external poit of view from which to witness our existence in the same way as when we watch a movie. We can watch a movie because we are not in any meaningful sense part of it.

But we are part of life. We are part of the flow of existence. More specifically, we are that section of existence that is capable of reflecting on existence itself, or, if we want to get trippy, we are the section of existence through which existence reflects on itself: we are existence’s self-consciousness.

This has enormous consequences on our freedom. Let us suppose someone tried to argue that our life is predetermined by a kind of external destiny that uses us like sockpuppets in the same way a character is written by a writer.

The first and most important consequence is that the very fact that they are saying that we are predetermined would itself be predetermined. That is to say, the person does not believe that we are predetermined because it is true that we are predetermined, but because he or she has been written as a fatalist.

Of course, the person in question would like to argue back that they are a fatalist because it is true that we are predetermined. But in defending this view, what they are truly saying is “everything is predetermined, except me when I argue that everything is predetermined.” This is obviously inconsistent: a theory–any theory–must be consistent with its own uttering. But fatalism cannot be truly uttered without incurring self-contradiction. The moment one says “Everything is predetermined,” they place themselves outside of the destiny they try to describe.

This happens for a subtle reason. Consciousness is inherently the place of freedom. It would take me a whole treatise to discuss this (and maybe I will write one at some point) but to be concise, we cannot be conscious of something without placing ourselves outside of it and beyond it. If I am conscious of this pen or this flower, this pen or this flower are the object of my attention, and I am the subject. No matter how strictly connected subject and object are, they are not the same, and when they are, there is no consciousness.*

If you read a few paragraphs back, I said that we are essentially existence’s self-consciousness. This means that through us existence perceives itself as its own object. Furthermore, in being conscious of itself, existence moves beyond necessity, exactly in the same way that any person (even a fatalist) places themselves outside of their own fatalism by being conscious of it.

In the next blog post I will discuss more closely how the ideas I just presented impact divination.

MQS

* I know that mystics like to argue that the subject-object distinction is artificial, but I’ll leave this for another post. My short answer is that without duality, unity is barren, while without unity, duality is inconsistent and inconceivable.